Potential dead horse: how bad is FF's deep DoF disadvantage?

If the sensors are equally efficient, then the noise will be the same. Modern compacts using sensors with BSI tech will tend to be more efficient than modern DSLR and mirrorless cameras.

You mean that noise should be the same. Theory doesn't trump empirical results. For the theory to play out perfectly in real life, then sensors have to be perfectly designed, their can't be any flaws at the level of the the pixels, etc. My experience, and it's only my experience, is that noise becomes worse at high ISO on all systems than it should, theoretically, so you get a better result at low ISO on all systems compared to high ISO on those same systems than a perfect noise curve tells you you should.

We have to distinguish between which system delivers better results and which system is more convenient to use.

Yes. However, systems which are convenient to use may deliver better results BECAUSE they are convenient to use. Therefore, some cameras belong in both categories, convenient to use, and delivering better results. An example would be compact cameras for hand-held macros of small flowers in distant fields. The convenient camera gets carried more often because it is smaller, gets better results with fewer changes which the shooter doesn't always want to hassle with on the less convenient camera, or have time for, etc.

The point is that FF gives you a wider range of options. If these options do not appeal to you, however, then, for sure, you would be better suited with a smaller format unless some other aspect of FF, such as greater resolution, was important.

Resolution should not be weighted on dpreview camera reviews. Considered, but not weighted. We are at a point where resolution is so much overkill for what consumers need, that it is essentially a non-factor. Read the article on the summary of the CEO interviews in Japan. 6 Mp is enough for a magazine spread. Now we have the GH4 which will take 8 Mp stills at 24 fps indefinitely. Are you better off with the GH4, or the D800 if you are a photojournalist covering a rally and need to capture a critical moment? Oh right, we still need to fork out thousands of dollars for 30+ Mp cameras, because an anonymous dpreview poster needs to print at 200" x 300" and only a certain camera will do. Give me a break. I bet that not more than 1% of the posters here have printed anything, ever, at more than 13x19", which my C8080 still handles just fine, thank you. The vast vast majority of people don't need more than 12 Mp any more than they need to buy a Hummer to drive to the supermarket.

Particular systems are inherently better than others for particular tasks, and some people find one system to represent a better balance of those factors that matter most to them. For me, even in the case of macro, I find that shallow DOF is often appealing:

You're right, it is a matter of taste, but a lot of the FF low-DOF bluster on these forums is driven by marketing, and "fanboys" (who are often paid shills for different brands--let's be honest) trying to distinguish one camera from another. As I pointed out, trying to get the critical parts of the photo or all of the photo in some cases in focus is a skill, and professional photographers have been doing that since photography was invented. Now certain posters on these forums want to depict in-focus photos as inferior. I like bokeh, but two thirds of the subject should not be out of focus. That's not art. It's an error. For my purposes, m43 strikes the best compromise. Others might feel differently. I do think that FF wins on noise and dynamic range, and those are good reasons to go with FF.

Latest in-depth reviews

The Fujifilm X-H1 is a top-of-the-range 24MP mirrorless camera with in-body stabilization and the company's most advanced array of video capabilities. We've tested the X-T2's big brother extensively to see how it performs.

Panasonic's Lumix DC-GX9 is a rangefinder-style mirrorless camera that offers quite a few upgrades over its predecessor, with a lower price tag to boot. We've spent the weekend with the GX9 and have plenty of thoughts to share, along with an initial set of sample photos.

Panasonic's new premium compact boasts a 24-360mm equiv. F3.3-6.4 zoom lens, making it the longest reaching 1"-type pocket camera on the market. We spent a little time with it; read our first impressions.

Latest buying guides

Quick. Unpredictable. Unwilling to sit still. Kids really are the ultimate test for a camera's autofocus system. We've compiled a short list of what we think are the best options for parents trying to keep up with young kids, and narrowed it down to one best all-rounder.

Landscape photography isn't as simple as just showing up in front of a beautiful view and taking a couple of pictures. Landscape shooters have a unique set of needs and requirements for their gear, and we've selected some of our favorites in this buying guide.

If you're a serious enthusiast or working pro, the very best digital cameras on the market will cost you at least $2000. That's a lot of money, but generally speaking these cameras offer the highest resolution, the best build quality and the most advanced video specs out there, as well as fast burst rates and top-notch autofocus.

Are you a speed freak? Hungry to photograph anything that goes zoom? Or perhaps you just want to get Sports Illustrated level shots of your child's soccer game. Keep reading to find out which cameras we think are best for sports and action shooting.